AA OOPS

A

A1TAPE

Well-Known Member
I thought they had fixed the tail number/fleet issues after the Hawaii incident where AA sent a NON ETOPS plane there as revenue then had to tell the FAA about the mistake and ferry it back to mainland. Sounds like the swiss cheese model bored through almost all the way - the fact they landed in FCO stopped the cheese from being fully bored through.

On the new flightkeys system can your admins lock out aircraft from routes so they CANT be put on certain legs?

I checked and nothing in the NOTAMS prohibiting a certain aircraft type from landing there.

onemileatatime.com

Oops: American Flies Wrong Boeing 787 To Italy, Causing Diversion

American accidentally operated the wrong type of Boeing 787 on a Philadelphia to Naples flight, causing a Rome diversion.
onemileatatime.com onemileatatime.com
 
Shocked the airport didnt put anything in the NOTAMS saying no 7879 allowed.

From Jonx
ACFT 789 NOT AUTHORIZED AS PER AIRPORT AUTHORITY

Bet its buried in the AIP somewhere. Honestly I could see some crews calling the airports bluff and telling the airport authority and ATC over the radio ‘okay prove it. Prove we cant land here and NOTAM IT!!!’
 
Continued

Prove we cant land here and NOTAM IT!!! If its a ground handling issue (convenience) and NOT a safety issue (killer NOTAMS -ILS US or RWY closed, etc) then we are proceeding inbound’. iImagine if they didnt have the fuel to divert and had to land at Naples, the airport would have figured out a way to handle it.

US airports figure out how to handle situations all the time. Such as the APU fails at an airport which doesnt have ground equipment or it broke down, airport/airline finds or borrows a way to fix the problem (gpu/air start).
 
This example is a reason management continues to misunderstand flight keys. It will not prevent dispatchers from doing stupid things, save the company money, lower required the number of required dispatchers or replace us entirely. It will sometimes correctly apply notams, but it is not fool proof.

It's a system that makes good dispatchers better and lazy dispatchers worse.
 
Bobber said:
This example is a reason management continues to misunderstand flight keys. It will not prevent dispatchers from doing stupid things, save the company money, lower required the number of required dispatchers or replace us entirely. It will sometimes correctly apply notams, but it is not fool proof.

It's a system that makes good dispatchers better and lazy dispatchers worse.
Click to expand...
In this case thought NO NOTAM was ever issued. Which is the airports responsibility. If u don’t want a certain aircraft type at ur airport NOTAM it or put it in the AIP.
 
Naples looks like PITA; one runway with five surface movement hot spots, 3.33° or 3.5° ILS-es, non-standard departure climb gradients.

And P.O.S. enav.it. I went looking for information about Naples on the ICAO-mandatory-available AIP and those •heels want to force you to sign-up for an account to access the AIP. And the dumb sign-up page is in baloney-speak only.
 
I could see AA sending a bill to NAP airport authorities seeking reimbursement for the diversion costs, hotels, pax vouchers, fuel, etc. Either the airport would ignore the bill, pay the bill, or have to prove/publish a restriction on 789s. Hopefully they would break out the AIP and AA can see for themselves if its published in there.
 
A1TAPE said:
I could see AA sending a bill to NAP airport authorities seeking reimbursement for the diversion costs, hotels, pax vouchers, fuel, etc. Either the airport would ignore the bill, pay the bill, or have to prove/publish a restriction on 789s. Hopefully they would break out the AIP and AA can see for themselves if its published in there.
Click to expand...
They won't. I have seen stuff like this at many airports. No NOTAM will be issued for these issues (only time would be for a wingspan restriction on runways the sizes we use at the larger carriers). I have seen places like CPR where a 752 can use for adequate airport usage but the 753 cannot unless an emergency is declared. It boils down to runway and airport certification for the size/weight and the airline getting them added to the Airport Authorized list. It is for the dispatchers and routers to verify that variant is allowed to go to these airports. Recently I had to call the routers when I got an "upgrade" for flights to DAB while they worked on the long runway, and had to call the routers to get one of the authorized on the 10-7A TMP to be allowed to go. If the SOC/NOC/OCC employees don't check it, enroute ATC would have no way to know or reason to stop the flights from going that far.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top